Mathematics under the Microscope Alexandre - MIMS EPrints

373 Pages·2007·12.92 MB·English

Mathematics under the Microscope
Borovik, Alexandre
2007
MIMS EPrint: 2007.112
Manchester Institute for Mathematical Sciences
School of Mathematics
The University of Manchester
Reports available from: http://eprints.maths.manchester.ac.uk/
And by contacting: The MIMS Secretary
School of Mathematics
The University of Manchester
Manchester, M13 9PL, UK
ISSN 1749-9097
Alexandre V. Borovik
Mathematics
under
the Microscope
Notes on Cognitive Aspects
of Mathematical Practice
September 5, 2007
Creative Commons

ALEXANDRE V. BOROVIK
MATHEMATICS UNDER THE MICROSCOPE
The book can be downloaded for free from
http://www.maths.manchester.ac.uk/∼avb/micromathematics/downloads
Unless otherwise expressly stated, all original content of
this book is created and copyrighted (cid:176)c 2006 by Alexandre V.
Borovik and is licensed for non-commercial use under a
CREATIVECOMMONSATTRIBUTION-NONCOMMERCIAL-NODERIVS2.0LICENSE.
You are free:
• to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work
Under the following conditions:
• Attribution. You must give the original author credit.
• Non-Commercial. You may not use this work for com-
mercial purposes.
• No Derivative Works. You may not alter, transform, or
build upon this work.
– For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to
others the licence terms of this work.
– Anyoftheseconditionscanbewaivedifyougetpermis-
sion from the copyright holder.
Your fair use and other rights are in no way affected
by the above.
This is a human-readable summary of the Legal Code (the
fulllicence);seehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/uk/legalcode.
Astronomer byJanVermeer,1632–1675. A portraitof Antonijvan Leeuwen-
hoek?
Preface
Skvoz(cid:126) volxebnyi(cid:36) pribor Levenguka ...
Nikolai(cid:36) Zabolockii(cid:36)
The portrayal of human thought has rarely been more
powerful and convincing than in Vermeer’s Astronomer. The
painting creates the illusion that you see the movement of
thought itself—as an embodied action, as a physical process
taking place in real space and time.
I use Astronomer as a visual metaphor for the principal
aim of the present book. I attempt to write about mathemat-
ical thinking as an objective, real-world process, something
which is actually moving and happening in our brains when
we do mathematics. Of course, it is a challenging task; in-
evitably, I have to concentrate on the simplest, atomic activ-
ities involved in mathematical practice—hence “the micro-
scope” of the title.
Among other things,
• I look at simple, minute activities, like placing brackets in
the sum
a+b+c+d+e.
• Ianalyzeeverydayobservationssoroutineandself-evident
that their mathematical nature usually remains unno-
ticed: for example, when you fold a sheet of paper, the
crease for some reason happens to be a perfect straight
line.
VI Preface
• I use palindromes, like MADAM, I’M ADAM, to illustrate
howmathematicsdealswithwordscomposedofsymbols—
and how it relates the word symmetry of palindromes to
the geometric symmetry of solid bodies.
• I even discuss the problem of dividing 10 apples among 5
people!
Why am I earnestly concerned with such ridiculously sim-
ple questions? Why do I believe that the answers are impor-
tant for our understanding of mathematics as a whole?
In this book, I ar-
gue that we cannot seri-
ously discuss mathemati-
We cannot seriously discuss mathe-
cal thinking without tak-
matical thinking without taking into
ing into account the limi-
account the limitations of our brain.
tations of the information-
processing capacity of our
brain. In our conscious
and totally controlled reasoning we can process about 16 bits
per second. In activities related to mathematics this miser-
able bit rate is further reduced to 12 bits per second in ad-
dition of decimal numbers and to 3 bits in counting individ-
ual objects. Meanwhile the visual processing module of our
braineasilyhandles10,000,000bitspersecond![166,pp.138
and143]Wecanhandlecomplexmathematicalconstructions
only because we repeatedly compress them until we reduce a
whole theory to a few symbols which we can then treat as
something simple; also because we encapsulate potentially
infinite mathematical processes, turning them into finite ob-
jects, which we then manipulate on a par with other much
simpler objects. On the other hand, we are lucky to have
some mathematical capacities directly wired in the powerful
subconscious modules of our brain responsible for visual and
speech processing and powered by these enormous machines.
As you will see, I pay special attention to order, symme-
try and parsing (that is, bracketing of a string of symbols) as
prominent examples of atomic mathematical concepts or pro-
cesses.I putsuch“atomicparticles”ofmathematicsatthe fo-
cus of the study. My position is diametrically opposite to that
of Martin Krieger who said in his recent book Doing Mathe-
matics [52] that he aimed at
MATHEMATICSUNDERTHEMICROSCOPE VER.0.919 5-SEP-2007/12:39 (cid:176)c ALEXANDREV.BOROVIK
Preface VII
a description of some of the the work that mathemati-
cians do, employing modern and sophisticated exam-
ples.
Unlike Krieger, I write about “simple things”. However, I
freely use examples from modern mathematical research,
and my understanding of “simple” is not confined to the
elementary-schoolclassroom.Ihopethataprofessionalmath-
ematician will find in the book sufficient non-trivial mathe-
matical material.
Thebookinevitablyasksthequestion“Howdoesthemath-
ematical brain work?” I try to reflect on the explosive de-
velopment of mathematical cognition, an emerging branch
of neurophysiology which purports to locate structures and
processes in the human brain responsible for mathematical
thinking [128, 138]. However, I am not a cognitive psycholo-
gist; I write about the cognitive mechanisms of mathemati-
cal thinking from the position of a practicing mathematician
who is trying to take a very close look through the magnify-
ingglassathisowneverydaywork.Iwritenotsomuchabout
discoveriesofcognitivescienceasoftheirimplicationsforour
understanding of mathematical practice. I do not even insist
on the ultimate correctness of my interpretations of findings
of cognitive psychologists and neurophysiologists; with sci-
ence developing at its present pace, the current understand-
ing of the internal working of the brain is no more than a
preliminarysketch;itis likelyto be overwrittenin the future
by deeper works.
Instead, I attempt something much more speculative and
risky. I take, as a working hypothesis, the assumption that
mathematics is produced by our brains and therefore bears
imprints of some of the intrinsic structural patterns of our
mind. If this is true, then a close look at mathematics might
reveal some of these imprints—not unlike the microscope re-
vealing the cellular structure of living tissue.
I am trying to bridge the gap between mathematics and
mathematical cognition by pointing to structures and pro-
cesses of mathematics which are sufficiently non-trivial to
be interesting to a mathematician, while being deeply inte-
grated into certain basic structures of our mind and which
may lie within reach of cognitive science. For example, I pay
special attention to Coxeter Theory. This theory lies in the
MATHEMATICSUNDERTHEMICROSCOPE VER.0.919 5-SEP-2007/12:39 (cid:176)c ALEXANDREV.BOROVIK
VIII Preface
very heart of modern mathematics and could be informally
described as an algebraic expression of the concept of sym-
metry; it is named after H. S. M. Coxeter who laid its foun-
dations in his seminal works [269, 270]. Coxeter Theory pro-
vides an example of a mathematical theory where we occa-
sionally have a glimpse of the inner working of our mind. I
suggest that Coxeter Theory is so natural and intuitive be-
cause its underlying cognitive mechanisms are deeply rooted
inboththevisualandverbalprocessingmodulesofourmind.
Moreover,CoxeterTheoryitselfhasclearlydefinedgeometric
(visual) and algebraic (verbal) components which perfectly
match the great visual / verbal divide of mathematical cog-
nition.
However, in paying at-
tentiontothe“microcosm”
of mathematics, I try not
Mathematics is the study of mental
tolosethelarge-scaleview
objects with reproducible properties.
of mathematics. One of
the principal points of the
book is the essential ver-
tical unity of mathematics, the natural integration of its
simplest objects and concepts into the complex hierarchy of
mathematics as a whole.
TheAstronomeris,again,
a useful metaphor. The
celestial globe, the fo-
One of the principal points of the
cal point of the paint-
book is the essential vertical unity of
ing, boldly places it into a
mathematics.
cosmological perspective.
The Astronomer is reach-
ing out to the Universe—
but, according to the widely held attribution of the painting,
he is Vermeer’s neighbor and friend Antonij van Leeuwen-
hoek,theinventorofthemicroscopeandthediscovererofthe
microcosm, a beautiful world of tiny creatures which no-one
had ever seen before. Van Leeuwenhoek also discovered the
cellular structure of living organisms, the basis of the unity
of life.
MATHEMATICSUNDERTHEMICROSCOPE VER.0.919 5-SEP-2007/12:39 (cid:176)c ALEXANDREV.BOROVIK
Preface IX
Microstructure of nerve fibers: a drawing by Antonij van Leeuwenhoek,
circa1718.Publicdomain.
The next principal feature of the book is that I center my
discussion of mathematics as a whole—in all its astonishing
unity—around the thesis, due to Davis and Hersh [19], that
mathematics is
thestudyofmentalobjectswithreproducibleproperties.
In the book, the Davis–Hersh thesis works at three levels.
Firstly, it allows us to place mathematics in the wider con-
textoftheevolutionofhumanculture.Chapter11ofthebook
is a brief diversion into memetics, an emerging interdisci-
plinary area of research concerned with the mechanisms of
evolution of human culture. The term meme, an analogue of
“gene”,wasmadepopularbyRichardDawkins[134]andwas
introduced into mainstream philosophy and cultural studies
by Daniel Dennett [23]. It refers to elementary units of cul-
tural transmission. I discuss the nature and role of “math-
ematical” memes in detail sufficient, I hope, for making the
claim that mathematical memes play a crucial role in many
meme complexes of human culture: they increase the preci-
sion of reproduction of the complex, thus giving it an evolu-
tionary advantage. Remarkably, the memes may remain in-
visible, unnoticed for centuries and not recognized as rightly
belonging to mathematics. In this book, I argue that this is a
characteristic property of “mathematical” memes:
If a meme has the intrinsic property that it increases
theprecisionofreproductionanderrorcorrectionofthe
MATHEMATICSUNDERTHEMICROSCOPE VER.0.919 5-SEP-2007/12:39 (cid:176)c ALEXANDREV.BOROVIK